ok.its only an opinion on my part.what i think google should have done was not to start from the scratch with an OS but rather could have bought a good brand like Ubuntu which it could use more effectively and efficiently as a wedge against the Redmond giant.both parties would have benefited immensely:google from an already established brand in the world of linux and ubuntu from google's massive name reputation cash resource.imagine ubuntu having google as a backer.wow,what a duo.whats your opinion?

Ubuntu already has plenty of brand-name power and financial backing. Remember Canonical?

yea i do.but the kind of influence,cash and exposure that google can bring to ubuntu is way beyond canonicals wildest imaginations,IMHO

Please, capitalise your sentences. Putting a space after punctuation characters will also help readability.

Anyway, "Google" is a much stronger brand than "Ubuntu" ever will be, so there's really not much incentive for Google to partner with Canonical. In fact, not everyone thinks that Ubuntu is much good outside of its target demographic of the Newbie/Desktop. (Don't want to get into why, as flames generally ensue).

What surprises me more though is why google haven't cosyed up with Intel on moblin, as that looks like a much better fit for what they're looking to do.

Ok, wil do. I just wish to see Ubuntu some day as a vibrant, well know OS not only in the desktop world, but also in the server and netbook realm.
ANy way, i believe Grand Central was not that profitable when Google decided to buy it. SO to me, UBuntu's viability as of now should be of no issue at all to Google. Thats just my opinion though.